-->
@Yassine
I see that've not read about Confucianism it came long before christianity and Islam and gave both women and men their rights and responsibilities , a very long time before both islam and christianity like about 551–479 BC
why do feminists defend islam and not christianity
Posts
Total:
101
-->
@Yassine
what do you say about khadijah the first wife of muhammad she was a woman a businesswoman , she owned a caravan long before marrying muhammad or muhammad having his midlife crisis ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, cough I mean started his own religion
isn't this proof enough that women back then had rights at least far more then the claims of muhammad back then
-->
@Lunar108
I see that've not read about Confucianism it came long before christianity and Islam and gave both women and men their rights and responsibilities , a very long time before both islam and christianity like about 551–479 BC
- Sure! Namely, it gave the woman the responsibility to be the Yin (evil) sub-human in the possession of her husband. Is you dense or smth'?
what do you say about khadijah the first wife of muhammad she was a woman a businesswoman , she owned a caravan long before marrying muhammad or muhammad having his midlife crisis ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, cough I mean started his own religion
- Yet, Khadijah required a trustworthy man to run her business, for no Arab will deal with a woman. Pre-Islamic Arab women were literal possessions to their husbands, they can be sold to other men or shared. Like it was in Europe up to the late 19th century. A woman could only own property if with the permission of her father or husband. Upon the men's death, his wives were inherited by his sons. They had no political or commercial place whatsoever. Female infanticide was the norm, if the first born is a girl, they considered her a bad omen that she had to be buried. Muhammed (pbuh)'s second successor Umar (raa) buried his first daughter alive before he became Muslim. Women had no ability to consent, for or against marriage. If her father wishes, he can marry her at whim or keep her unwed for life. They could not inherit, unless no other males exist. The could not initiate divorce no matter the circumstances. A murder of a woman, contrary to a man, did not warrant any retribution or blood-money, unless the perpetrator is a woman herself... Yeah, so much for rights... lol!
isn't this proof enough that women back then had rights at least far more then the claims of muhammad back then
- You're doing the 'stick my head in the sand' thing again, it's getting old! Muhammed (pbuh) was to first to:
1. Explicitly state the equitability of Men & Women.
2. Grant property rights to women equally as men, regardless of status or origin. This only attained in the West very recently, by 1939 in France for example.
3. Guarantee inheritance rights to women, not by virtue of nobility or testament, but an entitlement for all.
4. Establish mutual consent in marriage, from both the man & the woman, on the basis of 'offer & acceptance' – hence the adoption by the West later.
5. Grant divorce initiative to the woman, not just the man -as was the case in ancient times, & up till very recently in the West (just decades ago).
6. Prohibit the killing of women in war in any circumstance (along with children, elderly, monks, peasants, slaves...etc). This is still not the case in any Western Law, unfortunately.
7. Enjoined education on women along with men, "seeking knowledge is an obligation on every Muslim -and Muslimah". Just over a century ago, women were barred from attending university in Europe...
-->
@Yassine
how did khadijah came to own that business if women back then didn't have those rights ?
-->
@Yassine
I see that've not read about Confucianism it came long before christianity and Islam and gave both women and men their rights and responsibilities , a very long time before both islam and christianity like about 551–479 BC- Sure! Namely, it gave the woman the responsibility to be the Yin (evil) sub-human in the possession of her husband. Is you dense or smth'?
I see that've read nothing about Confucianism
-->
@Lunar108
how did khadijah came to own that business if women back then didn't have those rights ?
– Refer to: a woman could only own property if with the permission of her father or husband. They could not inherit, unless no other males exist. How come you don't know basic things about Arab History & claim to know Arabic. LOL!
I see that I've read nothing about Confucianism
- Indeed. Try next time.
-->
@Yassine
how did khadijah came to own that business if women back then didn't have those rights ?– Refer to: a woman could only own property if with the permission of her father or husband. They could not inherit, unless no other males exist. How come you don't know basic things about Arab History & claim to know Arabic. LOL!
you claim so but have yet to provide any evidence supporting your claim
which is women back then were oppressed
-->
@Lunar108
Women were very oppressed back then, however he is extremely wrong if he thinks Islam liberated them.
-->
@Lunar108
you claim so but have yet to provide any evidence supporting your claimwhich is women back then were oppressed
- I'm not your nanny, find out for yourself. Open a book, ask Google... This seems to be your last resort when you got nothing else to say! If you don't know basic things about the subject, why do you have opinions about it?
Women were very oppressed back then, however he is extremely wrong if he thinks Islam liberated them.
- Go on, elaborate. Claims are easy to make.
-->
@RationalMadman
@Yassine
1. a woman is given half the inherence of that of a man
2. can women marry four men too ?
3. can women divorce her husband in islam? the answer is yes but is it as easy as when her husband want to divorce her the answer is no
4.Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "If a husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual relation) and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning."
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 3237
In-book reference : Book 59, Hadith 48
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 4, Book 54, Hadith 460
In-book reference : Book 59, Hadith 48
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 4, Book 54, Hadith 460
5."He Who is in heaven is displeased with her till her husband is pleased with her."
Sunnah.com reference :sahih muslim Book 8, Hadith 67
English translation: Book 8, Hadith 0
Arabic reference : Book 8, Hadith 1021
English translation: Book 8, Hadith 0
Arabic reference : Book 8, Hadith 1021
6.The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "A woman should not fast (optional fasts) except with her husband's permission if he is at home (staying with her).
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5192
In-book reference : Book 67, Hadith 126
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 62, Hadith 120
In-book reference : Book 67, Hadith 126
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 62, Hadith 120
-->
@Yassine
you claim so but have yet to provide any evidence supporting your claimwhich is women back then were oppressed- I'm not your nanny, find out for yourself. Open a book, ask Google... This seems to be your last resort when you got nothing else to say! If you don't know basic things about the subject, why do you have opinions about it?
this is what I hate about Muslims they have claims without any evidence , when ask them to provide evidence they tell you to search for it
for all I know you could be making this up and spinning tall tales
Women were very oppressed back then, however he is extremely wrong if he thinks Islam liberated them.- Go on, elaborate. Claims are easy to make.
funny that this is coming from you , when you've yet to provide any evidence supporting your claims
-->
@Lunar108
He cannot support anything he says if he means to suggest that women have equal rights in Islam, that is the truth of it.
However, I am genuinely afraid to mess with this religion so I'll shut up for now. I am serious, it is not a joke how violent they will get if they know who speaks against them.
What I will do is just post this, regarding women and Islam.
-->
@Lunar108
1. a woman is given half the inherence of that of a man
- No such thing! The case is among full-siblings, where the full-sister gets half the inheritance of the full-brother. For obvious reasons, the brother is responsible for the expenses, whereas the sister isn't! It isn't even the case for half-siblings. In fact, women get more inheritance shares both in scale & scope; in scale, 80% of share combinations belong to woman; & in scope, a lot more female kinship relations have a right to inheritance than male kinship relations.
2. can women marry four men too ?
- No. That's not an object of justice or dignity, LOL!
3. can women divorce her husband in islam? the answer is yes but is it as easy as when her husband want to divorce her the answer is no
- Nonsense! It's not easy either way, divorce is discouraged in Sharia.
4.Allah's Messenger said, "If a husband calls his wife to his bed (i.e. to have sexual relation) and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning."
- Yes, unless the wife has a valid excuse, such as for medical or physiological reasons. He (pbuh) also said, "it is ample crime for a man to neglect who he responsible for" [as in the expenses for his family]– "The most perfect man in his faith among the believers is the one whose behavior is most excellent; and the best of you are those who are the best to their wives.". There is no individualism in Marriage. A marriage contract in Sharia is done with the prerequisite of sexual relations & security, material & emotional. There is no sense to the Marriage Institution without Intercourse.
6.The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "A woman should not fast (optional fasts) except with her husband's permission if he is at home (staying with her).
- In case he wishes to have intercourse with her, yes. I don't see you complaining about the husband compelled to provide for his wife?
this is what I hate about Muslims they have claims without any evidence , when ask them to provide evidence they tell you to search for it
- I'm not telling secrets. This stuff is known! Maybe you'll see your sources in a formal debate.
for all I know you could be making this up and spinning tall tales
- I see how you could think that, because that's all you do.
funny that this is coming from you , when you've yet to provide any evidence supporting your claims
- Am I hearing an echo...
He cannot support anything he says if he means to suggest that women have equal rights in Islam, that is the truth of it.
- You have it backwards buddy. LOL!
However, I am genuinely afraid to mess with this religion so I'll shut up for now. I am serious, it is not a joke how violent they will get if they know who speaks against them.
- We watch crime shows, there is no nation more violent than yours. It's unbelievable.
What I will do is just post this, regarding women and Islam.
- Why don't you share those thoughts in a formal debate?
-->
@Yassine
this is what I hate about Muslims they have claims without any evidence , when ask them to provide evidence they tell you to search for it- I'm not telling secrets. This stuff is known! Maybe you'll see your sources in a formal debate.for all I know you could be making this up and spinning tall tales- I see how you could think that, because that's all you do.funny that this is coming from you , when you've yet to provide any evidence supporting your claims- Am I hearing an echo...
you know that khadijah was a businesswoman and owned a caravan before muhammad married her ?
isn't this prove that women weren't oppressed back before islam , it's one supported by muslims themselves unless khadijah was oppressed back then too and didn't own a caravan and wasn't a rich businesswoman , an example of very successful woman in the times of which you claim that women were oppressed by men your claims -of women being oppressed back then is destroyed by her existence.
you claim that women were oppressed and weren't given any rights until muhammad came and gave them their rights , provide evidence supporting your claim of women being oppressed
-->
@Lunar108
you know that khadijah was a businesswoman and owned a caravan before muhammad married her ?
- Not a caravan, a share. Hind Bint Utbah was a wealthy woman under her father too, when he died, she become destitute, & would steal from her husband Abu Sufyan to feed herself. Khadijah's father was a wealthy man, & she is twice widowed, both her previous husbands were affluent as well. Wealth accumulated in her possession, because her father & her husbands chose to grant it to her. Case in point, Khadijah is the only such woman known in Quraysh.
isn't this prove that women weren't oppressed back before islam ,
- Even if Khadijah was the queen of Arabia, it won't change the fact that women had virtually no rights then. One woman does not represent all women.
it's one supported by muslims themselves unless khadijah was oppressed back then too and didn't own a caravan and wasn't a rich businesswoman , an example of very successful woman in the times of which you claim that women were oppressed by men your claims -of women being oppressed back then is destroyed by her existence.
- Dude, what are you blabbering about?! More so, why are you acting so shocked? All of this & more was happening in the West not even a century ago, let alone Arabia 15 centuries ago. Women gained divorce rights in Italy late 80s, & only gained full property rights in France in 1939! Shortly before that they couldn't vote. Up until a century ago, women were barred from attending higher education. Heck, women were sold by their own husbands in Britain up until the 1880s when it was banned. Back then, they didn't have even have property rights or inheritance rights. Does that mean there were no wealthy British women? There were, albeit rare.
you claim that women were oppressed and weren't given any rights until muhammad came and gave them their rights , provide evidence supporting your claim of women being oppressed
- What rights were they given...? Property rights? No. Inheritance rights? No. Consensual marriage rights? No. Divorce rights? No. Education rights? No. Protection rights? No... these weren't given to 19th century Europeans, let alone 7th century Arabia. In face, none of these rights were granted to pre-Islamic Women. Period.
-->
@Yassine
A Zedku for Yassine.
A vile woman is an assumption.
You might be vile.
And people are usually vile for a reason.
As a generalization,
Focussing on individuals, doesn't address the collective ideology.
And not all women are angels,
As are not all men,
But all women and all men are individuals,
And not property to be silenced and separated.
Silence and separation,
Is the work of a vile person.
-->
@Yassine
you know that khadijah was a businesswoman and owned a caravan before muhammad married her ?- Not a caravan, a share. Hind Bint Utbah was a wealthy woman under her father too, when he died, she become destitute, & would steal from her husband Abu Sufyan to feed herself. Khadijah's father was a wealthy man, & she is twice widowed, both her previous husbands were affluent as well. Wealth accumulated in her possession, because her father & her husbands chose to grant it to her. Case in point, Khadijah is the only such woman known in Quraysh.
let me guess , khadijah is the muslim woman and Hind Bint Utbah is the kaffar woman right ? and you're accusing me of sexism
isn't this prove that women weren't oppressed back before islam ,- Even if Khadijah was the queen of Arabia, it won't change the fact that women had virtually no rights then. One woman does not represent all women.
empty claims with not even a shred of evidence
it's one supported by muslims themselves unless khadijah was oppressed back then too and didn't own a caravan and wasn't a rich businesswoman , an example of very successful woman in the times of which you claim that women were oppressed by men your claims -of women being oppressed back then is destroyed by her existence.- Dude, what are you blabbering about?! More so, why are you acting so shocked? All of this & more was happening in the West not even a century ago, let alone Arabia 15 centuries ago. Women gained divorce rights in Italy late 80s, & only gained full property rights in France in 1939! Shortly before that they couldn't vote. Up until a century ago, women were barred from attending higher education. Heck, women were sold by their own husbands in Britain up until the 1880s when it was banned. Back then, they didn't have even have property rights or inheritance rights. Does that mean there were no wealthy British women? There were, albeit rare.
very shocked by the stupidity of your claims
and yet in ancient china they were given rights , why are you comparing , what are you getting into by comparing what islam did with what happened in Europe , they were bad yes , does that make your case better no
1. islam is a religion , euorpe is a country -a group of countries- , IDK but I think that christianity was not ok with such acts
you claim that women were oppressed and weren't given any rights until muhammad came and gave them their rights , provide evidence supporting your claim of women being oppressed- What rights were they given...? Property rights? No. Inheritance rights? No. Consensual marriage rights? No. Divorce rights? No. Education rights? No. Protection rights? No... these weren't given to 19th century Europeans, let alone 7th century Arabia. In face, none of these rights were granted to pre-Islamic Women. Period.
according to whom ? you , muhammad ?
-->
@zedvictor4
A vile woman is an assumption.
- Someone just said: "...not all women are angels"
You might be vile.
- Your wife might be as well.
And people are usually vile for a reason.
- Doesn't excuse their vileness.
As a generalization,Focussing on individuals, doesn't address the collective ideology.
- Indeed, 1 in 4 men suffer domestic abuse in the US is just too high. Hence, conversion to Islam is the answer.
And not all women are angels,
- Not the vile ones for sure.
As are not all men,
- Sure.
But all women and all men are individuals,
- Is this a riddle...?
And not property to be silenced and separated.
- So I'm guessing according to you 96% of relationships in the US are between a property & a human...?
Silence and separation,Is the work of a vile person.
- Hence the verse, indeed.
-->
@Lunar108
let me guess , khadijah is the muslim woman and Hind Bint Utbah is the kaffar woman right ?
- Wut? They both were pagans at one point, & they both became Muslim. That's entirely besides the point. The point is that wealth in the hands of Arab women is decided by men in their lives. Khadijah & Hind were both wealthy at one point, because their fathers doted on them. Yet, the latter became poor & the former kept her wealth after their fathers' deaths. Why? Simply because men in Khadija's life decided not to take her wealth, as opposed to Hind.
and you're accusing me of sexism
- How old are you? You speak like a child.
empty claims with not even a shred of evidence
- Yours indeed. Absolutely! Your argument is, 'we have one wealthy merchant woman (who can only trade by proxy relying on a man), therefore all women have all the rights'. That's the worst hasty generalization I ever seen, a logical fallacy. I'll give you one better, Queen Victoria was the most powerful monarch of her time, yet British wives were sold by their husbands in the streets under her rule, women had no property rights or inheritance rights or education rights...
very shocked by the stupidity of your claimsand yet in ancient china they were given rights
- No. They had no property, inheritance, education, marital, divorce, or martial rights... No matter how much you insist. I know Chinese History. Stop lying.
, why are you comparing , what are you getting into by comparing what islam did with what happened in Europe , they were bad yes , does that make your case better no
- Let's see: Islam came & guaranteed personhood, property, inheritance, education, marital, divorce, & martial rights...etc to women. 7th century Arabs or 20th century Europeans (or elsewhere) had no such rights. Rights are better than no rights. I think my case is pretty solid.
1. islam is a religion , euorpe is a country -a group of countries- , IDK but I think that christianity was not ok with such acts
- Indeed, Europe should've adopted Islam, instead of Christianity. Well, a third of Europe was Muslim in the past, before the lovely peaceful European Christians purged all of them by death or exile (except in a few places, like Albania).
according to whom ? you , muhammad ?
- Let me get this straight, are you suggesting that women in pre-Islamic Arabia had all the aforementioned rights, that they had to right to own property without male guardianship? Or that they had a right to inheritance? Or that they had a right to marry with their consent? Or the right to initiate divorce? Or the right to protection? Or the right to education? Or the right to participate in commercial affairs? Or political affairs?...etc – none of which we find in absolutely any pre-Islamic society, wether Roman, Greek, Persian, Indian or Chinese, or Western (before late 20th century). Why go this far though? Just to tell yourself the beloved Prophet (pbuh) was not the one to grants these rights? DAMN! That's a little too much hate.
-->
@Yassine
How many women "suffer domestic abuse" under Islam?
Well, I suppose that if the domestic abuse of women isn't deemed to occur, then the answer will be zero.
Let me ask you a simple hypothetical question.
If your brother was to rape your wife, who would you embrace first?
Your brother or your wife.
-->
@zedvictor4
How many women "suffer domestic abuse" under Islam?
- 1 in 3 women in the US suffer domestic physical abuse. Worry about that first. You don't want to be an incoherent hypocrite!
Well, I suppose that if the domestic abuse of women isn't deemed to occur, then the answer will be zero.
- That's irrelevant to the subject here. We're talking about women abusing men, why do you keep bringing up abused women?! Or are you one of those feminists?
Let me ask you a simple hypothetical question.If your brother was to rape your wife, who would you embrace first?Your brother or your wife.
- I was gunna ask about your reaction if your wife was to rape your brother. But I don't wanna hear more of your threesome fetishes.
-->
@zedvictor4
people like yassine who are extremely hateful and obsessed of the west and america are the reason for 9/11 and similar acts , he gets out of his way to change the subject from talking about islam to talking about the west ,
I mean the USA thrown a nuke at the japanese yet they aren't this hateful , he probably suffers from inferiority complex and extremely jealous that the westren countries are developed while most muslim countries are third world countries
don't feel bad many muslim dynasties suffered from worse problems sadly all the evidence and books mentioning that are in arabic
also the arabic islamic history isn't as well documented in english as that of Europe
this allows many muslims to bullshit and tell people whatever they want about their religion including making whatever story they like
-->
@Yassine
Another Zedku for Yassine.
On the spot.
And scholarly tone diminishes,
Into the background hiss,
Of recrimination,
And cheap jibes.
From which,
Ironically,
A message,
Is received.
Roger that Yas
Over and out.
-->
@Lunar108
People are the products of their upbringing.
I was going to say, sadly.
But sadness is pointless.
One has to accept that people are simply what they have become.
I work regularly with people who label as Muslim, and all are friendly,
Though how they might be more deeply affected by enforced religious conditioning is hard to tell.
And of course, the same applies to those affected by enforced Christian conditioning.
More so in the U.S. perhaps, rather than here in the U.K.
I'm still of the opinion though, that save for the extremes of society,
Radical dimwits, and the power seekers who would coerce the radical dimwits.
The moderate core of society, only wants a quiet life.
-->
@zedvictor4
I work regularly with people who label as Muslim, and all are friendly,Though how they might be more deeply affected by enforced religious conditioning is hard to tell.
Exactly, I totally agree with you. Muslims-in-name are often nice and friendly people that ignore the brutality and severity of their holy scripture and religion's history.
I am fine with them but I wish they'd drop the act, of course they can't or their families will disown them and peers will bully and reject them.
Feminist support Muslim women's rights to present themselves in whatever way they choose to. Christian women often fight against that arguing that head coverings or face coverings etc are inappropriate. Feminist don't necessarily support the whole religion they support the woman within that religion to choose what they want to do with their life. Christian women often fight that all women should carry their own value and moral system and if they don't then they're whores or they're disgusting.
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
You seem to be talking about the hijab , it's one of my favorite subjects
it's quite funny how feminists in Muslim majority (middle east) countries are fighting for women rights of not having to wear hijab
while feminists in western countries are fighting for the rights of wearing it
makes one wonder which side should they support ?
maybe if evil extremists of muslims -not all of them the evil 1%- didn't use it to hide bombs
there wouldn't have been that much opposition to wearing it in public in the western countries
You asked I answered. Why aren't feminists complaining about women taking drugs to their boyfriends in prison and their kids diapers? A lot of times it comes down to what do you hold personally sensitive to yourself. Again if 99% don't carry bombs and 1% carry bombs why should the 99% have to suffer for the 1%?
what about the victims of those 1% , it takes much less that 1% to cause extensive damage to society , besides don't run away from my first question ?
which side should we support ?
the feminists in Muslim majority (middle east) countries are fighting for women rights of not having to wear hijab
or the feminists in western countries are fighting for the rights of wearing it